I enjoyed this book - it goes over a number of the classic religion and science "battles" - from Galileo to Creationism and Intelligent Design.
However what I also noticed - and I don't think the book paid enough attention to this - how quickly religion was able to incorporate new scientific discoveries. No sooner had Darwin published "The Origin of Species" than theologians were explaining how this was quite compatible with the religion of the Bible, and of course similarly with Galileo and Newton and others.
So this raises the question as to how much of a battle there really is here. Historically it seems as if it is typically other scientists who are the "dogmatists" who try to resist change.
For Galileo it was the Aristotelian scientists who opposed his views, the Pope had supported Galileo and funded some of his work.
When we cover science in the Nineteenth century we find it was science that was prompting nonsense such as the "higher" and "lower" races of man, Phrenology - the science of bumps on the head and so on. It was science that taught masturbation would lead to blindness and that homosexuality was an illness.
I'd have found it interesting to hear a bit more of this counter-argument which is more historically accurate but not how the story tends to be told today.